What's the point in installing that 'mongrel' while You have abou 22.000 packages in FreeBSD packages repository?

From what I know, it works, if You are not sure, then download it and try it under VirtualBox.

__________________religions, worst damnation of mankind"If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus TorvaldsLinux is not UNIX! Face it! It is not an insult. It is fact: GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU's Not UNIX”.vermaden's:linksresourcesdeviantartspreadbsd

Has anybody tried Debian with the Freebsd kernel? Sounds nice to me, basically a pf/altq enabled system with a nice(r) package system. But does it work i real life?

What is niceR about apt-get? Those custom Debian's cheep hacks that often change normal behavior of packages and introduce bugs or the fact that they are starting daemons and configuring your system without your permission? Do not get me wrong. I am no fan of FreeBSD and one of my principal complaints is that userland is too GNU-ish and uses to many GNU basic tools instead of BSD tools. Debina/FreeBSD takes that to extreme and replaces completely crippled (by GNUisms) BSD userland on FreeBSD and replace it with GNU. For the record PF/altq is in my book useless on FreeBSD. PF version shipped with FreeBSD is stuck in the year 2007 and there has been HUGE improvements since then in PF. Altq last time I used FreeBSD was not in generic kernel and has to be enabled manually (by compiling custom kernel). The work on FreeBSD userland has indeed stopped almost completely couple years ago. Most developers use MAC as they are desktops but if you need ZFS and do not want to pay to Oracle it is probably a fine system.

Cheers,
Oko

P.S. You probably should change your nick from bsdperson into gnuperson

You can run Debian and FreeBSD at the same time and a Linux compat layer. Very few take advantage of this.

It was run by Aurelian Jarno- I'm not sure if it is now. The name means little to those outside of the qemu and debian communities.

Generally, the OpenBSD community finds no use for either FreeBSD, NetBSD, or any other. There are plenty of jokes about such systems on the mailing lists- and here with Oko's reply. Any OpenBSD developer that wishes to help someone using anything else, has to do such in secret for fear of ridicule and ostracization. I'm on the mailing lists, so I know what is said. Before it is said; yes, there is a lot of spam and flamebaiting. There are the occasional honest questions which do get bombarded by the mob.

Most debian users won't use the Debian/kFreeBSD system because of the GNU "holiness" attitude. Hearing about Stallman gets old fast.

Use it if you want. Make your own decision. The answers here are based on opinion.
I'll need to explain the last statement. Even with experience, your judgment will be affected by your perception and attitude. Mental perception is not an absolute and is prone to human error. Emotions and personal situations affect judgment.

Generally, the OpenBSD community finds no use for either FreeBSD, NetBSD, or any other. There are plenty of jokes about such systems on the mailing lists- and here with Oko's reply.

This is totally ridiculous statement and shows your lack of knowledge when it comes to OpenBSD community. We like to use the right tool for the right job and more often then not OpenBSD is not a right tool for a job. OpenBSD web-site for one was run for ages on Solaris for a good reasons. I wish I could use NetBSD for super computing for which OpenBSD is ill suited but the lack of commercial support is preventing me. Many, many OpenBSD users use FreeBSD for ZFS. Development of PPC compiler is more or less joint NetBSD and OpenBSD enterprise.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ninguem

Any OpenBSD developer that wishes to help someone using anything else, has to do such in secret for fear of ridicule and ostracization. I'm on the mailing lists, so I know what is said.

So how many developers do you know personally? That is just a pile of c*666.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ninguem

Most debian users won't use the Debian/kFreeBSD system because of the GNU "holiness" attitude. Hearing about Stallman gets old fast.

This sounds very much like my argument which you apparently didn't read carefully. Most BSD users would not use Debian/kFreeBSD system because of strong preference for BSD over GNU userland.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ninguem

Use it if you want. Make your own decision. The answers here are based on opinion.

This is totally ridiculous statement and shows your lack of knowledge when it comes to OpenBSD community.

No, it doesn't. DeRaadt has made a thread as to what is wrong with FreeBSD and did such for fun.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oko

So how many developers do you know personally? That is just a pile of c*666.

Who I know doesn't matter. You would only ask this question if you were going to do what I mentioned. The word crap isn't censored on this forum. You you also have the choice of: lies, rubbish, trash, vocal defecation, poppycock, junk, stories, tall tales, et al.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oko

This sounds very much like my argument which you apparently didn't read carefully. Most BSD users would not use Debian/kFreeBSD system because for strong preference for BSD over GNU userland.

No such statement was made.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oko

+1
Finally, something intelligent in your post.

Okay. The word nicer doesn't need a capital letter for emphasis, use the italics and bold options together. The word is cheap- inexpensive, low quality- and not cheep- onomatopoeia based upon the sound young birds make. "There have been huge" and not "there has been HUGE " it would be "There has been a huge". "The" should be in front of the sentence starting with "PF version." Altq does not need to be used at all. Using the m or n dash before "by compiling" is what you should have done. It is "a" or "the" before "custom kernel." The use of the definite or indefinite article is needed more in English. For someone that is well versed in programming and systems, your grammar is representative of a nine year old.

Flame bait is beginning to take over this discussion, & it will now end. Yes, I understand it is easy to fall into shorthand, especially when opposing views may be at play, but good technical discussion always stays close to fact & assertions which are backed up by solid quoted references. Factual content has been a hallmark of these for a long time. Let's keep that tradition going.

Let's leave the flame bait to the fanboys on other forums which aren't as interested in truth.

When you install a package all of its dependencies are also installed.

If you uninstall that package, you have then all these useless dependencies on the disk.

On debian, you can de-install such "stale" dependencies with one command. You can't do that with pkgsrc or ports, can you?

On OpenBSD (I am OpenBSD user) default package system is pkg_add (ports are only used to create packages by developers or advanced users) so it is for practical purpose binary distribution (just like Debian). pkg_add does automatically resolve dependences (much like ports not only on OpenBSD but also on FreeBSD and pkgsrc and even binary pkgin (tool for binary packages built by pkgsrc)). It is very easy to recursively deinstall packages or to list packages which you can prune. pkg_add, ports, pkgsrc have all their week and strong points (irrelevant for most but very special power users) but a feel comfortable stating that they are superior to apt-get.

I use Linux when I have to. My Linux of choice is RedHat (Scientific) but I had to use Debian quite a bit. There are definitely many instances in which Linux is more suitable or sometimes the only system that can do the job but apt-get argument is definitely not one of them.

Let's leave the flame bait to the fanboys on other forums which aren't as interested in truth.

I apologize to all forum members as it seems that my first post which indeed was strongly worded but on topic stirred the emotions. This is my last post on topic and I will refrain from answering any flame posts.

P.S. By the way the fundamental problem with Debina/kFreeBSD is licensing as FreeBSD kernel can not be relicensed to GPL even by an infinite stretch of imagination. That is way the project (Debian/kFreeBSD) was dormant for many, many years.

P.S. By the way the fundamental problem with Debian/kFreeBSD is licensing as FreeBSD kernel can not be relicensed to GPL even by an infinite stretch of imagination. That is way the project (Debian/kFreeBSD) was dormant for many, many years.

Agreed.

Stallman rejected the idea of using the BSD kernel.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia_GNU-entry

Thomas Bushnell, the initial Hurd architect, said in hindsight that the decision to start a new kernel rather than adapt the BSD work set the project back considerably, and that the project should have used the BSD kernel for this reason.

When you install a package all of its dependencies are also installed.

Same as with FreeBSD's pkg_add -r package command, You probably confused FreeBSD with Slackware which package management system does not resolve dependencies, all BSDs have dependency resolving mechanisms in their package systems.

Quote:

If you uninstall that package, you have then all these useless dependencies on the disk.

Maybe in Debian, here the only things that are left are THE THINGS THAT YOU HAVE CREATED, like configuration files.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bashrules

On debian, you can de-install such "stale" dependencies with one command. You can't do that with pkgsrc or ports, can you?

__________________religions, worst damnation of mankind"If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus TorvaldsLinux is not UNIX! Face it! It is not an insult. It is fact: GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU's Not UNIX”.vermaden's:linksresourcesdeviantartspreadbsd

P.S. You probably should change your nick from bsdperson into gnuperson

...and what has a nickname with Debian/FreeBSD??

Quote:

It is interesting to note that even with Linux not really caring about security and having a non disclosure policy, things still end up being more secure than OpenBSD because of the presence of extended access controls. Being able to restrict access in such a powerful way which reinforces that simply trying to eliminate all bugs at the code level while noble, is an inferior approach.

I said, I was not interested in bite flames anymore in particularly the one that has nothing to do with the original post. MAC control was not mentioned in the original post so I do not know why are you brining that stuff up? If you need MAC control Windows, Linux, and FreeBSD have that so theoretically should be equally secure. OpenBSD doesn't have and it is not going to get any time soon. Consequently, I have seen many people in OpenBSD community migrating from OpenBSD to Windows due to security reasons.

__________________religions, worst damnation of mankind"If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus TorvaldsLinux is not UNIX! Face it! It is not an insult. It is fact: GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU's Not UNIX”.vermaden's:linksresourcesdeviantartspreadbsd

The one thing i find about Debian/kFreeBSD is the partitioner, it is the most fussy OS i know. It doesn't accept anything less than a primary partition (very annoying if you already have 3 primaries). Although now that i think about it Windows is pretty fussy & annoying also, i rank them on nearly same level of annoyingness for problems & issues but windows outstrips it with their constant bugs and working failures of the most basic tools.
Another consistent thing i have found is a USB error, installed it on 4 different comps & a virtualbox and you still get the same usb error. Which is wierd because installing the standard FreeBSD will not present this error. No matter how many ways or systems you install it on.
Those are the main reasons why i don't use it (more the usb error, it f's up my keyboard), handling a simple hardware incompatibility or software problem that is 1 off is kool, but a consistent error is just f'ing frustrating (especially with an unresponsive keyboard).
Its just easier in my opinion to run FreeBSD and compile what you want yourself (also more satisfying), unless you just like the idea of having the "Debian" brand name in front of it.